Viewport width =
May 28, 2007 | by  | in Features | [ssba]

Are Women Safe On Our Streets?

Paying even the slightest attention to the TV news over the last couple of months would give Wellingtonian women a lot to be worried about. With two high-profile rape cases in the central city in just over a month, Salient feature writer Nicola Kean asks whether the city is a safe place to go out at night.

It’s a scenario common to students all over the city on a Friday or Saturday night. You have a few drinks at home and head to Courtenay Place or Cuba Street to meet friends, you have a few more drinks. Then you head home, often alone. For at least two young Wellington women within the last three months, a night on the town like this one has ended in tragedy.

In late March, a young woman was walking home down after breaking off from a group of friends. “She was walking up Tory Street”, says Detective Senior Sergeant Simon Perry from across his desk in the Central Wellington Police station. “She walked past a group of guys and as a result of that one of these guys followed her, sort of led her into the Mitre 10 car park. He then indecently assaulted her.” The woman escaped, only be followed and allegedly raped again by the offender. He has yet to be caught, although Perry says the Police are still investigating.

In the same area about a month later a similar incident occurred, with a woman being raped at knifepoint somewhere between Cambridge and Tory Streets after midnight. The alleged offender has since been caught.

Both incidents, along with a rape that took place in Porirua around the same time, made national headlines. Coinciding with the Police releasing national crime statistics, TV news correspondents bemoaned the rise in sexual assaults in the Wellington region. With two thirds of the surveyed women making use of one sexual assault support service under the age of 25, and 50 per cent of those under the age of 20, young women do have a reason to be afraid to feel safe when going out at night.

According to the most recent statistics released by the Police, the number of sexual attacks in Wellington – that’s including Porirua, but excluding the Hutt – between July and December 2006 was 132, up from 98 in the same period the previous year. The number of ‘sexual affronts’ has also increased, although by much less. Overall, Wellington has seen a 35 per cent increase in reported sexual crimes over the past year.

However, Perry says that besides tricky statistical misrepresentation (for example, it could merely mean that a higher number of women are reporting sexual attacks to Police), those figures encompass more than random attacks on the streets. “The assaults are right across the board, they are domestic assaults, a case of a husband raping his wife, and so on.”

In fact, 2001 research completed by Jan Jordan, a senior lecturer in criminology at Victoria University – that looked at the experiences of 48 New Zealand women over 50 rape cases – showed that as many as 70 per cent of the victims previously knew the offender. Tanya Newman, service manager of the Wellington branch of Rape Crisis says, “women are at risk generally – not just women who are out late at night. In fact it is statistically more dangerous to be at home – the vast majority of rape and sexual abuse is perpetrated by people known to the victim. Perpetrators are more likely to be a victim’s partner, father, step-father, uncle, swim coach, family friend, work colleague, friend, etc, than a stranger down a dark alley – which is what people commonly expect.”

But in the last year, Perry says random attacks by complete strangers in Brooklyn and in Kensington Street have been reported to Police. “As for the actual offenses in the CBD, the [offense in March] was the first one we’ve had in a period of time, and we’ve had a few on the trot, so to speak.”

“The victim hasn’t engaged with them, they haven’t gone home together or anything like that. They’ve just occurred. We average about one a week, but these aren’t all off the street. Certainly over the last month we’ve had a number of these assaults in town. They’re still as serious as the ones that happen in a bar, they’re just as bad. And it’s very difficult to try and locate the guys.”

On the front line of dealing with rape and sexual assault in Wellington are groups like Rape Crisis and the Sexual Abuse Help Foundation. The Foundation was set up more than 20 years ago, says General Manager Helen Sullivan, to “provide support for women who were going through the legal process following sexual assault. Going through the forensic medicals, police statement taking, and then to court.”

Operating with the help of Government money and private donations, the Foundation provides support services and a 24-hour help line for victims of sexual assault. In fact, while I was talking with Sullivan and service coordinator Aurelia Selwyn in their spacious, friendly offices, Sullivan received a support call that she had to leave the interview to deal with.

Selwyn’s not sure if the increase in sexual assaults shown in the Police statistics reflects the true picture. “It’s always a hard thing to gauge really. It could be a matter of more people coming forward. There have been a number of cases recently that have gained media attention, so that seems to highlight that sexual assault as an issue. In terms of the amount of cases we’re called in for, on an annual basis it’s somewhere between 40 and 50 assaults in the Wellington area.”

“Lately it’s been more towards the 50,” adds Sullivan. “In the past six months, on average one assault a week is reported to the police.” However, she says that for the numbers that come to the Foundation that do report their cases to the Police there are fewer who would rather not report the assaults.

Down the road at the offices of Rape Crisis Newman says that her organization has also seen an increase in the numbers of calls. “During the past year the number of support sessions we provide to survivors of rape and sexual abuse and/oar their family and friends has almost doubled.” But she attributes this increase to a new support centre and extending it’s opening hours, along with increased advertising.

Despite this, Newman says most rape and sexual abuse is not reported, and if it is, a good proportion is not reported the same day. “Our legal system needs to improve so that it is safe for survivors to report incidents of sexual violence and justice can actually be achieved. Until that happens, reporting will not increase.” Indeed, in Jordan’s survey of rape victims, only 62 per cent of those surveyed reported the attack immediately or on the same day. Of the remaining women, only half reported within two weeks of the assault – by which time the window for forensic examination has closed.

Perry says there are a number of reasons why women don’t necessarily report assaults to the Police. “To be perfectly honest, I don’t think we see the worst of the ones. Because they don’t think it’s worthwhile, it’s a mistake, or believe that they’re to blame. We don’t doubt that there are people taking advantage of them.”

Other factors that are believed to impact on a woman’s decision to report a rape to the Police include the processes that are followed once it is reported. A forensic examination involving a doctor examining the woman’s genitals and combing her public hair and scraping her fingernails to retrieve any evidence should generally be performed within 72 hours of the assault.

Then there is the process of Police interviews. One of the roles the Help Foundation plays is to guide and support victims through the process, but it still involves a level of what Selwyn calls re-traumatisation. “The process itself is very, very intrusive, very, very time consuming and some women just decide they would much rather not go though it.”

“Any woman who decides to go through that process, it’s a very courageous step that she’s taking,” she continues. Especially given the low rate of conviction of rape offenders. Off the top of her head, Newman at Rape Crisis estimates the number of rape cases that result in conviction is about six per cent. “Nowhere near good enough!”

Perry says that the Police have struggled to see offenders convicted, especially in cases where there has been alcohol involved. “We haven’t secured a lot of convictions in these types of cases, particularly because of issues involving consent. Ones that are convicted are low.” But he adds that women should report rapes and sexual assaults, to make sure the offender does not have the opportunity to strike again.

But he stresses that while women have to look after themselves and their friends while in town, overall Wellington is a reasonably safe place to live and party. “If you look at the amount of people who come in to Wellington on a Friday and Saturday night – and Courtenay Place is still traveling along at a pretty high rate right through to five o’clock in the morning – the offences that have been reported …and the amount of alcohol that has been drunk, it’s pretty low comparatively.

“If you take the latest two [assaults] as an example, they’ve been drinking before they came in to town, they’re students, they’re poor, they haven’t got money for taxis. They split up from their friends, and they live pretty locally so they think walking home is okay.”

While there are things that individual women can do to reduce the risk of being sexually assaulted, the Police and the Wellington City Council are working together to make the city a safer place. Perry says that the Police have stepped up their patrols around the areas where the two latest offenses occurred, and they have been working with the Council and the landowners to have lights and gates installed.

Wellington City Councilor Stephanie Cook – who has an interest in safety issues – says the Council is consistently working to try and make the central city safer. “What we’re doing is what we’re always doing when we identify a hot spot, looking really closely at that area and looking at what is assisting offenders to offend in those areas. Also redeploying city safety officers in that area to start patrolling more frequently.”

Walkwise, the yellow-coated, helpful Council employees who patrol the streets throughout the day and night, are a important part the Council’s strategy. “They can be redeployed within hotspots as they emerge,” says Cook. “I believe they’re also being redeployed in the areas where these sexual assaults have happened.” While Walkwise don’t have the power of arrest, they can call in the Police when necessary.

“We’re now very active with liaising with the Police,” says Cook, “and looking at emerging issues – like the assaults that have been happening recently – and what we can do to help. We’ve done safety audits of the central city, to identify places that were unsafe and what we could do to make those safer. It’s sometimes difficult because they may be privately owned, and we have to work with landowners.”

But for Andrew Gibson, owner of The Establishment on Courtenay Place, there needs to be a more comprehensive approach to safety in the city. “At these hot spots on a Wednesday night in particular there [needs to be] a bit of a presence from the Police and from Walkwise. I’d personally like to see it taken at a bit more of a higher level, with all of us working together.”

“I think that the Council and the Police need to get a bit more behind the students in Wellington, I’m mean because there’s 30,000 of you now. Publicans also; we make a lot revenue out of students.”

And Gibson is putting his money where his mouth is. About four months ago he started up a shuttle service – originally to boost revenue by providing a free pick-up service. “But in light of what’s been happening in town and trying to make people feel a little bit safer we saw that it was part of our responsibility to get people, students in particular, home. They’re coming down here until 2 or 3am and so it’s only fair that we give them a ride home.”

While in the past The Establishment has taken people to homes as far away as Karori, generally the service is provided for those living within the city.

“We’ve decided to do that as part of our host responsibility, on a continuous basis. On Wednesdays it wouldn’t uncommon for us to do 10 or 12 trips. Otherwise they walk up that hill, and it’s just not on. We just don’t want them doing it.”

While there are late buses to the suburbs in the weekends, Gibson is also calling for bars, in conjunction with Police and the Council, to put on buses specifically for students on Wednesday, Friday and Saturday nights – where there’s “not old dodgy fellas sitting on that bus as well”.

So, while the increase in Police figures may not mean that sexual assaults and rape are on the rise in Wellington, the two latest cases are a reminder that Wellington is not always a safe place. Sexual assault support services, the Police, bar owners and the Council all advise young women to take precautions – to walk home with friends, take a bus or a taxi – to reduce the risk of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

“Unfortunately, the current reality is that women do need to be safety conscious,” says Newman. “However, modifying our behaviour in order to try and keep safe is a breach of our human rights. Women have the right to be safe regardless of our behaviour. Rape and sexual abuse are opportunistic crimes that are about power and control. Nothing justifies sexual violence, it is never the victim’s fault.”

But there are actions that can be taken to reduce the risk.

If you have been the victim of sexual assault or rape, or know someone who has, there are a number of organisations in Wellington that can help provide support and counseling. They include:

  • Sexual Abuse Help Foundation hotline: 499 7532 or
  • Wellington Rape Crisis: 473 5357 or
  • Victoria University Counseling Service: 463 5310 or
  • Heleyni Pratley, VUWSA Welfare Vice-President: 463 6985 or
  • VUWSA also provide the Campus Angels service, where an Angel can walk you home from the University library at night if you feel unsafe walking alone.

Comments on this article are now closed.


About the Author ()

Nicola Kean: feature writer, philanthropist, womanly woman. Nicola is the smallest member of the Salient team, but eats really large pieces of lasagne. Favourites include 80s music, the scent of fresh pine needles and long walks on the beach.

Comments (95)

Trackback URL / Comments RSS Feed

  1. Tristan Egarr says:

    Last night a woman was raped on Otago Uni’s campus (well, Castle street annex), but since they have installed security cameras earlier this year they have footage of the three men and are hopeful that they can catch them. We have a “video camera hidden in the Activities Room under the guise of a motion detector” but I don’t know about cameras on campus outdoors – does anyone know if we have any? SHOULD we have any, would they make campus safer (think of all those notices up earlier in the year about the homies who attacked people), or would they invade our privacy?

  2. Taliesin says:

    While there are undoubtedly some cases of rape that go unreported, false accusations of sexual abuse are extremely common both in New Zealand and overseas.

    However, the ideologically-driven abuse industry would have us believe that men always lie and women always tell the truth when it comes to sexual abuse allegations and it is so typical of this industry to incite fear and hatred for its own gain. Some years ago, the abuse industry promoted the myth that “one in three” girls would be sexually abused by their own fathers. That got them the proceeds of a telethon. I wonder how much rape crisis is angling for.

    False allegations of sexual (and other) abuse are at a pandemic level, and are made up for many reasons, such as for making ACC claims, destroying a person’s credibility in Family Court hearings and sometimes just attention seeking.

    They are horrific crimes against humanity and against the persons falsely accused. They are also a complete waste of police resources, not to mention an affront to the many genuine victims of abuse that do exist out there.

    There is but one suitable penalty for making false accusations and that is to give the slanderous accuser the same penalty that their intended victim would have received. Not only would this make people think twice about making false accusations against others, but it would be impossible to think of a more just punishment.

  3. dave says:

    Taliesen, do you have any evidence, or you doing the typical uninformed expert commentary based on anecdotes and assumptions? I’d hate to think people believe that sexual violence organisations are an “industry”. It’s often been stated anyway that false accusations often stem from previous abuse anyway…

  4. Tristan Egarr says:

    “False allegations of sexual (and other) abuse are at a pandemic level”… Taliesin you have cited no evidence to support this claim, and you have not said what a pandemic level is – because “pandemic level” means nothing and, anyway, there is no evidence to support your claim.

    Only a tiny, tiny amount of rape claims result in conviction. While some may be false claims, the vast bulk of evidence suggests that the low conviction rate is due to the difficulty in either proving or disproving rape, which means that many, many actual rapes result in no conviction. So how are we to know whether a claim is false?

    Your proposal to convict and punish claimants would see many women who were genuinely raped but who lack the evidence to lock away the rapist be charged and penalised for this lack. It is YOUR proposal which would be a “horrific crime” against humanity and waste court (and police) resources. It would see women who have already been abused be doubly penalised for the failings of the justice system.

    Taliesin, I doubt you have any interest in this topic other than a grudge against women who have been abused, but in the interests of fairness I invite you to give even one piece of evidence in support of your pandemic claim. I sincerely doubt you can do so.

  5. I know this comment will be controversial but here there is an article from NZ Herald quoting police that over 60% of rape complaints may be false- . Despite the high figure, i wont count it as a pandemic. I hope that counts as one piece of evidence. With regards to Talisans possibility that people making false complaints for rape should recieve the same jail sentence as a rapist, i strongly oppose such a measure. First, there is a big difference between raping someone and making false accusations against someone. Rape is far worse than false allegations. Second, there is the very real possibility of detering real rape victims complaining to the police. Third, there is a more sensible alternative. When police hear about a rape complaint they investigate but keep it secret the name of the alleged rapist. If there is iron clad proof, and appears to be a delibrate effort to smear someone, the false complaintant should be prosecuted, especially if its the second false complaint from that person. but such prosecutions should be rare, due to the detering real complaitants issue. On the other hand, false complaints do use up police time and resources. when determining if a rape complaint is false, asuming the compliant is not false until proven otherwise would be a good step. Say if Girl X claims she was raped in Lower Hutt at 1 pm yeaterday by boy Y, but if Boy Y was seen by store video camera in Wellington at from noon to 2 pm yesterday then its likely to be false
    Also, one possiblity could be for a police strategy to encorage rape victims to come forward immediately, because if police can investigate qiuckly they will still have forsenic evidence. This might get more convictions. I do understand that after being raped a girl will be very stressed and upset and low on self esteem and lack the courage to come to the police.

  6. Taliesin says:

    Firstly, with regard to statistics, there are two sorts we see. One is the result of rigorous academic research and the other is the alarmist figures concocted by the abuse industry. The latter is what we mostly hear, even though they hardly qualify as statistics.

    I am sorry to disappoint Tristan, but I do NOT have “a grudge against women who have been abused”.

    I simply do not have a grudge against men.

    After many years of counselling men who have been the victims of maliciuous false accusations, I can assure you that the many men who have been falsely imprisoned for rape would not consider the false accsusations against them to be trivial.

    Can anybody honestly justify that people should either be believed or disbelieved purely on the baisis of their sex?

  7. James says:

    Nicholas you state – Rape is far worse than false allegations………

    I know a number of men who have been subjected to false claims of abuse/rape that would find your comment laugable and insulting.

    Why is the damage inflicted by a false complaint, the effect of which is devasating on the alleged offender not worthy of a criminal charge against the false accuser?
    Your reasons against charging the liar is solely based on the gender of the victim and some vauge spin about discouraging rape victims from contacting the police.
    You totally discount the effect of a false allegation on a man based soley on the liar being a woman.

    Your sensible solution is once again designed to protect the liar not the falsely accused and really is pie in the sky.

    There have been a growing number of false complaints highlighted in the media this year. Its lairs who are women who make them, they need to held criminally accountable and to make ammends to the victim (the falsely accused men) not be let off to do it again.

  8. I’m not trying to underplay the suffering of those subject to false allegations, but one does not want to imprison genuine rape victims if there is insufficent proof to back up their allegations. I did actually encourage criniomal offenses against women who lie to make false complaints but only where there is watertight evidence. the issue of rape victims not coming forward due to fears of being falsely accused of being liars could be very real.
    Being forced to have sexual relations against your consent would no doubt be a horrific experience that no-one should undergo. As for my solution protecting the liar, not the victim of the lie, lets see how it would work, if I was the victim of the lie and a ficticious girl named jennifer was the liar. Jennefir goes to the Police and tells them i raped her. The police only make public the fact that Jennifer complained about male X raping her. The police interview me. They investigate, only refering to me as person X, and when they discover the allegations are false they stop investigating. No-one but the Police and Jennifer and myself ever find out who person X is.
    Although the plan is imperfect, I will be interested if anyone has a better plan.

  9. Taliesin says:

    He or she should only be imprisoned only when it is proven “beyond reasonable doubt” that he or she made a malicious false accusation, just like a man or woman should only be imprisoned for rape when it is proven “beyond reasonable doubt”, not on teh basis of one person’s uncorroborated evidence.

    Of course, if a man goes to prison as a result of a malicious false accusation, he stands a good chance of being raped in jail.

    We would never tolerate rape being sued as a punisghment for female criminals.

    Why is it alright if it happens to males?

  10. Tristan Egarr says:

    Nicholas’ proposal to conceal the identity of suspects until proven guilty is a sensible one, and removes most of the problems Taliesin associates with false rape charges. It is reasonable to expect not to be publicly shamed for a crime one has not been proven guilty of.

    The bigger problem of course is that most men who do commit actual rape are never even convicted, because the crime is of such a nature that it is very hard to prove. Thus while many men may have been falsely accused, the likelihood of these men being convicted is much lower than of men falsely accused of another crime such as theft; the burden of proof is simply too high.

    Furthermore, depite what Taliesin asserts, research into New Zealand’s prisons suggests that rape is in fact very uncommon inside (unlike in US jails). Which means that, once again, what we have is simply more misogynistic propaganda. And given that you continue to insist that being accused of rape is as bad as being rape, I will continue to assert that you seem to have a grudge against abused women.

  11. Taliesin says:

    Tristan, any woman that knows me will assure you that I do not have a grudge against women. While I do may not especially like man-hating nazis, thankfully the overwhelming majority of women do not fit into that category. However, it is clear that you hold an irrational grudge against men.

    In answer to your comment, if I was given a choice of being wrongfully locked up for eight years or being raped, I could not rule out choosing the latter.

    Which would YOU choose?

  12. Tristan Egarr says:

    “if I was given a choice of being wrongfully locked up for eight years or being raped, I could not rule out choosing the latter”

    Taliesin, this is not the choice here. You promote a system whereby women are discouraged from reporting rape with the threat of prison – meaning that these women would receive both rape AND prison. Why? Because rape is notoriously hard to prove. Take a look at the Police’s crime statistics for 2006. They recorded 2,476 sexual assaults, of which only 58% were “resolved” (either through conviction or clearance). That means that, for almost half, we simply do not know what happened.

    If, as you propose, women who report rape but cannot convict the alleged offender are then put in jail for “lying”, we have an even worse situation. Rape Crisis estimate that six percent of rape cases (including those which the police never hear of) result in no conviction, because the burden of proof lies with the accused. Of course, I acknowledge that this is an estimate, but the police statistics show that at least a thousand reported sexual assaults are unresolved, and we have no idea whether they are false claims or true claims which lack enough evidence for a conviction. We can add to this the rapes which are not reported, through fear or any other reason.

    So in answer to your question, what I would like is for the police to investigate any accusation thoroughly and fairly. If a judge is certain that an offence took place, but also knows that the proof is not technically strong enough, they are forced to throw the case out of court – which means that the current justice system favours the offender.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    Here I am going to go all long-winded, and talk about some of the pros and cons of feminism that have been raised in this thread, if you will excuse me.

    Now, perhaps it was unfair of me to accuse you of holding a grudge. I did so because you have made unproven assertions about a “pandemic” of false claims without providing one single piece of evidence, and because you make use of sensationalist terms such as “man-hating nazis”. This leads me to suspect that there is something more than actual concern for justice going on here – however, it was wrong of me to cast slander around when I can cite evidence as to why you are incorrect. So here goes.

    1) “Of course, if a man goes to prison as a result of a malicious false accusation, he stands a good chance of being raped in jail.”
    Actually, research shows that this claim is nothing other than mere sensationalism. Greg Newbold estimates that in NZ jails, one rape occurs approximately every two years (see the Problem of Prisons, p. 164). Of course, no one should be jailed unjustly, but Ministry of Justice and Police research also suggests that it is more common for actual rapists to be found not guilty (the burden of proof again) than innocent men to be convicted. Your assertion allowed you to make the life of the accused appear worse than it is, ergo, sensationalism.

    2) “man-hating nazis”. Since the Nazis were misogynists, this term simply doesn’t make sense. Please read up on the Reductio ad Hitlerum and Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies, because resorting to simply accusing your opponents of being fascist only demonstrates one thing: that you lack the ability to construct an argument.

    Now, there have been a number of feminists who are all too ready to blame all of their own problems on men and expect the State to fix everything. Rebecca Stringer and a number of other feminists have documented this form of feminist ressentiment. Back in the late ’70s there were communes in this country which banned roosters and other male animals, not to mention men. But thanks to feminists like Stringer, we have moved on from them. The argument against blaming everything on men comes from WITHIN feminism itself, and is used by feminists to show why they need to update the way they view power: a woman who makes a false rape claim is usind power against someone just as a rapist abuses power, albeit on a different level.

    I’ve met dozens of feminists; many seem to me to be a little extreme. Some even advocate monthly paid menstrual leave for all working women, which I find absurd. But never have I met a single one who hates men, because feminism has moved on since 1980. If only the misogynists opened their eyes and realised this….

    3) “I do not have a grudge against women… it is clear that you hold an irrational grudge against men.”
    Now Taliesin, that’s not actually what I said. I accused you of having a grudge against women who have been abused, because your proposal would make life even more intolerable for people who have already suffered too much. But as I stated above, it wasn’t helpful for me to make an ad hominem attack when I should really be disproving you. Anyway… I am a man. I am a man who likes rugby, beer, meat pies, death metal and sex, although that’s beside the point since none of these things are necessary in judging manliness. I do not hate myself for being a man.

    However, I am at least willing to recognise that men still retain the bulk of power in this country. We hold most of the seats in parliament, we run most of the companies. Women are sexually objectified and expected to please men in a way that men are not. Look at the ratio of male to female pornography. Women are accused of being hos is a way that men are not – look at they way women are treated on web forums, the kind of language used against them which is not used against men. And men continue to rape women and commit violence against women in a way that women do not match.

    So yes, some women do make false claims of rape. These almost never result in conviction, due to the burden of proof. And in many cases the accused receive name suppression, as they should. But the bulk of power continues to rest with men, which is why sensationalist claims of a “pandemic” of false accusations are dangerous and misogynistic. Anyone who is falsely accused deserves sympathy, but not to the extent that it becomes impossible to give justice to actual victims. So I won’t keep accusing you of holding grudges, but I do challenge you to be a little more sympathetic to the fact that thousands of men continue to sexually abuse women, many (probably most) of whom never receive justice. Because the problem of violence against women is on a far greater scale than the problem of false rape accusations.

  13. Wiily says:


    Stop being a misandrist and answer the bloody question!

  14. Taliesin says:

    Tristan, that IS the choice being offerd by the question. Please do not try to weasel your way out of it.

    You quote some statistics, but how reliable are they?

    Rape Crisis is part of the absue industry and is ideologically motivated. The abuse industry is notorious for making up statistics to suit its funding desires.

    I know what Newbold claims, but I also have heard from a number of men who say they have been raped in prison. Do you disbelieve them? Or are you saying that we should believe women but disbelieve men?

    As for your claim that men overwhelmingly abuse women, that has been completely discredited. Proper academic studies conducted by Otago University and many others overseas (as opposed to the made-up figures quoted by the abuse industry)prove that violence by women against men is about the same as the reverse.

    Check out the Longtitudinal Study that Otago underttok. I think there may be a link on

    Don’t simply believe everything that the abuse industry says.

    While you are at it, have a look at ‘The Myth of Male Power’ by Warren Farrell.

    Don’t be afraid to have your way of thinking challenged.

    There is a copy in the Wellington Public Library.

  15. Taliesin says:

    Further to my earlier post.


    Young women and men equally likely to be perpetrators of domestic violence
    The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health & Development Study involves following a birth cohort of 1000 NZ men and women born in 1972-3. This sample population has been used to study a number of medical and social issues.

    Director of the study Dr Phil Silva and colleagues have recently co-authored a paper summarising research on partner violence studied when the participants were 21. They found that women and men are equally likely to engage in violence against their partners, and this parallels results from overseas research. Many foreign studies have demonstrated that both women and men equally engage in physical violence in their intimate relationships, although men are likely to cause more injury than women.

    Last year saw the publication of the Justice Department’s $1.5 million research project “Hitting Home: men speak about abuse of women partners”, which defined domestic abuse as “abuse of women by male partners” and claimed an alarming prevalence of physical and psychological violence by men against women.

    The Dunedin figures demonstrate that partners are mutually involved and that domestic violence is a relationship problem. Only when both men and women recognise and acknowledge the part they play in the conflict will the problem be able to be redressed, and happier, mutually more trusting and co-operative relationships be established. Making men solely responsible for the problem gives women carte blanche to be as vicious or nasty as they like. This will only hasten the demise of their relationships and leave both parties angry and embittered.

    Predictably, the National Collective of Independent Refuges slammed the research findings, claiming that the 17 – page report was manipulating statistics and giving men excuses for violence.

  16. John says:

    All you academics can talk about gender constructs and statistics till the fucking cows come home. The only way this shit is gonna stop stop is if females arm themselves with a can of mace or some freaky ass martial-art testicle twisting technique which leaves these scumbags impotent for life. If you think that that state will save you while you’re being dragged into some ally off Courtney place to be raped you need your head checked. Growing you fingernails and going for the eyes is the only exit in that situation.

  17. Taliesin says:

    OK John, what would bou think if men started using some kind of genital-hurting disabling tecnique when attacked by women.

    Or dco you think that men should simply take it like they usually do when BEATEN BY WOMEN?

  18. Taliesin says:

    OK John, what would you think if men started using some kind of genital-hurting disabling tecnique when attacked by women.

    Or dco you think that men should simply take it like they usually do when BEATEN BY WOMEN?

  19. dave says:

    yes taliesen women and men are equally likely to engage in physical violence against partners, but even in studies which state that, there is an overwhelming acknowledgement that men are far more likely to mete out serious abuse than women. The amount of women who kill their partners wouldn’t even come close to the amount of men who kill their partners.

  20. Taliesin says:


    Do not forget though that women are more likely to use weapons and that men are less likely to defend themselves.

    When they do, they are the ones who are arrested, thanks to the police’s gender-biased operational policy.

    Women also can get off on the so-called “battered woman syndrome” defence, while there is no such defence for battered men.

    Gay Oakes was a feminist cause celebre for killing her partner and hiding the body, with the help of the local women’s refuge, because she claimed to be “battered”.

    Yet she was the violent one in the relationship and killed her partner upon learning he was planning to leave her and her abuse.

    Just imagine the hysterical baying for blood that would ensue if if a man tried to claim a ‘battered man syndrome” defence

  21. dave says:

    again I ask, is there any evidence of a police bias, or women being more likely to use weapons? gay oakes is an isolated example of female spousal killers (there haven’t been too many, and she killed a decade and a half ago). and as far as i’m aware, the courts in new zealand haven’t fully recognised the battered women’s syndrome defence anyway

  22. Taliesin says:

    Dave, yes there is. Read the police operations manual, and it is spelled out there.

    Also, look at scholarly academic studies instead of the figures made up by the abuse industry. I have given some links above that may help.

    I was a men’s counsellor for many years and I have met many men who were arrested for the crimes of their batterers.

    Many of them were forced to go on anti-male brainwashing programmes called “anti-violence programmes”.

    Until we stop denying that domestic violence is a two-way street and until we stop exclusively applying ideologically-driven gender-biased “solutions”, this blight on our society will never go away.

  23. Taliesin says:

    Dave, yes there is. Read the police operations manual, and it is spelled out there.

    Also, look at scholarly academic studies instead of the figures made up by the abuse industry. I have given some links above that may help.

    I was a men’s counsellor for many years and I have met many men who were arrested for the crimes of their batterers.

    Many of them were forced to go on anti-male brainwashing programmes called “anti-violence programmes”.

    Until we stop denying that domestic violence is a two-way street and until we stop exclusively applying ideologically-driven gender-biased “solutions”, this blight on our society will never go away.

  24. Laura says:

    Taliesin – the fact that women are more likely to use weapons and men less likely to defend themselves is an entirely unrelated argument to rape. I have no idea how you managed to link the two above, but it seems you’re grasping at straws for examples, and Tristan appears to be right that you’ve got some kind of a grudge against women.

    Do you mean that because women are equally likely to beat men in the case of domestic violence, that perhaps women deserve to be raped? Or have I read your confused and weak argument incorrectly?

    And as for you asking whether Tristan would rather be imprisoned for eight years or raped – how is that even a relevant question? When you say a falsely accused man would likely be raped in prison (although Tristan appears to have proven this claim incorrect) as ‘punishment’ – isn’t it a problem with the Corrections system failing to ensure the safety of prisoners, rather than condoning the activity as a ‘punishment’? Or are women somehow to blame for it?

  25. Taliesin says:

    Laura, my point is simple, that we respect, value and protect men to the same degree as we respect, value and protect women.

    We need accept abuse as being something that happens to, and is perpetrated by, both genders, and stop making excuses for one gender and making scapegoats out of the other gender.

    Violence is a human issue, not a gender one.

  26. Tristan Egarr says:

    Abuse does happen to both genders, and is perpetrated by both genders.
    This is a fairly obvious truth, and no intelligent person would deny this.

    But, what we have been explaining is that it is perpetrated by one gender on a scale far exceeding that of the other gender. As the study that Taliesin quoted stated, the abuse perpetrated by men against women causes more injury – and more harm – than that which happens the other way around.

    We continue to live in a male dominated society, in which men do damage to men, women do damage to women, men do damage to women, and women do damage to men – but in which more damaging violence is perpetrated by men against women than in any other category (except possibly men against men, and the psychological damage teen girls do to one another, which deserves a whole other post).

    So yes, we need to be aware that people will lie about what happens to them. Men will lie about rape, and women will lie about rape. But if we claim that rape is some kind of ‘conspiracy’ to keep men down, then we are simply enforcing the violent status quo. And this is not okay, even for a nihilist such as myself. Because it is cruel, and, even if I throw morality out the window, I don’t like cruelty, and I don’t like the one-sided cruely that continues to get enforced.

    We need to protect men who are wrongly accused. This is obvious. But this problem is tiny in scale when compared to the need to protect women against rape, and the need to ensure that women who are raped receive a fair hearing. Because due to the burden of proof, justice still favours the abuser. Thus facetious claims of a “pandemic” of fake abuse claims inevitably play into the hands of the abuser.

  27. Taliesin says:


    The problem of men being wrongly accused is NOT tiny just because the abuse industry says it is.

    It is easy to say that this is male-dominated society when one does not think about the issues. Reality is not so simplistic.

    To quote from the back cover of Warren Farrell’s ‘The Myth of Male Power’:

    “If men are the powerful sex:

    Why do we accept men, and men only, being sent in vast numbers to die in war?

    Why are they the suicide sex? (In the USA, grandfathers are 1350% more likely to commit suicide than grandmothers)

    How is it that prostate cancer and breast cancer are both significant killers – but breast cancer receives more attention and funding? (In the USA, breast cancer research receives 660& more funding).”

    Here in New Zealand, men are treated more harshly by the judicial system. A man almost inevitably receives a stiffer sentence than a woman convicted of an identical crime. Women are portrayed in the judicial system, as being victims and men as being perpetrators. Men who have the misfortune to end up in the family court struggling to maintain meaningful relationships with their children are treated like dogs.

    Men live shorter lives than women. If it was the other way around, it would be a huge issue. Instead, men are blamed, as usual.

    Only men are portrayed as bumbling idiots in television programmes.

    Only men are made the scapegoats for everything that is wrong in society.

    Only men are accused of dominating and controlling women, even though just as many women dominate and control men, and that is somehow acceptable.

    At the end of the day, issues like violence are dominated by ideology and the ideology is based on hysterical hatred and irrational fear of men that is far removed from reality.

    By the way Tristan, you haven’t answered my question yet.

  28. Chuck says:

    Below is a quote from Tanya Newman, service manager of the Wellington branch of Rape Crisis.

    “Unfortunately, the current reality is that women do need to be safety conscious,” says Newman. “However, modifying our behaviour in order to try and keep safe is a breach of our human rights. Women have the right to be safe regardless of our behaviour. Rape and sexual abuse are opportunistic crimes that are about power and control. Nothing justifies sexual violence, it is never the victim’s fault.”

    She sounds about as mature as Paris Hilton. Speaking of Paris, I wonder which she would find most traumatic – being raped or spending 3 days in jail.

    Tanya, in the real world every adult has to take responsibility for their actions. I remember many years ago at an end of year function I had far too much to drink and fell asleep while waiting for a train. I woke up minus my wallet with all my holiday pay. I had next to nothing in the bank and a difficult few weeks till my next pay. Who did I blame – myself. Of course, the fact I had passed out did not justify someone stealing my wallet. In stead of whinging and moaning I learned from my experience.

    If a woman is walking home reasonable sober and not a 3am and gets raped she has my utmost sympathy. However, if a woman goes to a bar, has too much to drink and accepts a ride home from someone she does not know unlike Paris she should accept some responsibly.

    Tristan, I suggest you try reading the posts. No one has suggested that if a woman accuses a man of rape and the jury finds the man not guilty that the woman be charged with perjury unless there is a prima facie case that she committed perjury. I have been on a jury and it was clear that the woman committed perjury yet she was not charged. So I know it does go on.

    If a woman has put a man though a rape trial and it can be proved that she commuted perjury what would you consider a just penalty? Bear in mind if her lies were believed the man would likely be jailed for 8 to 10 years.

  29. Tristan Egarr says:

    “Why do we accept men, and men only, being sent in vast numbers to die in war?”
    This is a lie. There are many women in the US army occupying Iraq. There are also female suicide bombers in Palestine.

    “Only men are made the scapegoats for everything that is wrong in society.”
    This is also a lie. You yourself are a part of society, and clearly you don’t blame men for everytihng. Michael Laws and John Tamihere have thousands of listeners to their talkback shows, and they rail against women almost daily. So whatever imaginary matriarchal society you are describing, it sure ain’t New Zealand.

    Although I have already answered your question I obviously need to explain again why I have not given you the answer you want – because men are not locked up for eight years when wrongfully accused of rape. That sort of sentence is only meted out to cases of extremely violent rape in unusual circumstances; therefore the two options you give are misleadlingly loaded in order to goad me into saying I want to be raped. And since it is far more common for an actual rape to result in no conviction, than it is for a woman to lie about being raped, your question is inane. Tra la la.

  30. jo the mo says:


    i bet the nightmares about that blank face spending your holiday pay were simply tourturous. did you freeze with dread every time a man stood in front of you in a service line with money to spend? could he be the monster who defaced you like a nobody; violated your dignity; fored his way inside you (r pocket) and raped you of that money that defined you as a breathing, feeling human being?

    this experience very possibly has made you question your very ability to ever engage in another meaningful employment relationship- ever. the fear of breaking down emotionally on the job or of being stripped naked of all that holiday pay is al consuming isn’t it?

    every day does the loss of your wallet make you question for worth as a man? do you wake up sweating and not leave the house for fear of your wallet being ripped from your exposed body all over again?

    with all this suffering i am astounded that you can have the wisdom and karmic insight to move on with your life- taking responsibilty for your having been violated in such a brutal way.

    that you passed out, woke up without your wallet and did not whinge or moan but, rather moved on from such an ordeal is a lesson in responsibility and indurance for all of us. Furthermore, to use your experience to help others – who may not have the self esteem to bounce back in the same admirable way- illustrates a stregnth of will that is simply admirable.

    However, you woke up without your wallet.

    had you woken up without your pants, possibly your virginity, or any sense of power or worth i think your quaint reflection on justice might be somewhat tested

    The thought of you being on a jury with the all knowing power to tell when a woman is lying about that which is closest and precious to her is anything but reassuring. The thought of people with as little compassion as you demonstrate, living and studying alongside us is terrifying.

    I wonder if you witnessed a rape as you walked home from a night of sober partying (because we all know you learnt your lesson)- would you take the time to aid the young woman or laugh at her stupidity for going out hoping to have a good time only to be taught a lesson?

    I recently collected for the annual rape crisis appeal and was thrilled to receive an equal amount of interest and money from both sexes. I wondered about those men that gave support- Had their sister, mother, daughter or friend been raped? Statistics would indicate that yes- somwone close to them had been. They no doubt had had to deal with the reppecussions of it- a woman or girl they loved questioning their sense of worth, raped of their pride and dignity. maybe they still had to comfort this person, years after the event.
    Or perhaps they were just decent men who empathized with other human beings. Either way I am glad they’re out there because the thought of people like you scare me.

    Ignorance and blame and self loathing are what you represent chuck. I really hope you are never raped- with your weak disposition and evident lack of human relation I dont think you would survive. however, rest assured that if somrthing terrible ever does happen to you, there are those poeple out there who care enough not to blame, but to support you.

  31. Taliesin says:

    Yes, Tristan, there are some female soldiers in Iraq. But female soldiers (in western countries) are ALWAYS volunteers. Only MEN are ever conscripted in times of war.

    There would have been no mission to rescue Jessica Lynch had she been a man.

    Do you think this is fair?

    If you were on a sinking ship, would you think it was fair that women got to leave the boast first?

    What about men opening doors or giving up seats for women, as I was taught to do?

    Surely that is a sign of subservience?

    Men are biologically programmed to protect women, so men will be putting themselves at additional risk to rescue females.

    That is why so many men believe all the lies of the abuse industry or buy into the white ribbon day fraud. Because they have a compulsion to protect women, which is why a dottery, chivalrous judge will generally believe the poor little women over the big bad man.

    Most men would never hit a woman; it is not the done thing for a man. Conversely, it is not rare for a small woman to physically attack a larger man, pull his hair, bite him and kick his genitals, knowing that he will never fight back. On the rare instance that a man does defend himself, he is invariably the one arrested.

    I have met many men who feared their violent partners, but were more afraid of people finding out they were scared of a woman. The shame of being a battered man is often worse than the actual battering.

    Violence is violence, regardless of the sex of the perpetrator, and it is not helpful for groups with vested interests to promote irrational fear and hysterical hatred of half of the population.

    I have not listened to talkback radio for years, and I imagine you might well get some anti-female callers. You also probably get callers who have just been on the piss with Elvis or who were abducted by aliens. Talkback radio does not have the influence of newspapers or television, both of which take a strong misandrist stance on gender issues.

    No, you have not answered my question. There is no one answer I want, only an honest choice between the options given, not meaningless weasel words.

    If I was given a choice of being wrongfully locked up for eight years or being raped, I could not rule out choosing the latter. Which would YOU choose?

    I suggest reading the Myth of Male Power. It is in the Wellington Public Library, call number 305.32 FAR.

    I am not telling you that you have to agree with it.

    But it might show you that the men’s movement is not a bunch of women-hating misogynists, but a movement of men – and women – who love care about men as well as women.

  32. bloke says:

    Spot on Chuck!

    Now lets add something else to the equation: what happens when law and order collapses? Yes, rapes increase dramatically. Guys shouldn’t be surprise at all, our bodies constantly remind us that we need to pass on our sperm. We are like dogs (or any other mammal) and If there is no punishment, we’ll just take it when it is within reach. If you’re a woman, don’t be fooled by the lying bastard who tells you that you’re the only one who can turn him on. Rush him to the doctors, he’s one sick puppy.

    So how about a little equality? How about teaching women to respect how men operate? How about fathers telling their daughters not to wear that “fuck me” outfit to that party? How about women learn to accept again that if she is a slut she is a slut and not a woman with a high high self esteem?

  33. Tristan Egarr says:

    oh, erm… “bloke”, please apologise to taliesin for trying to ruin his argument. I think he is intelligent, he knows what he is talking about, and although I think he is wrong we are having a decent debate, but… even if rape is a biological fact that does not make it ok, as you suggest – “How about teaching women to respect how men operate” etc… mwa ha ha….. as if blaming victims for being victims is smart. Wow.

    So… I guess I should give Chabal a +1 battle axe and teach you how men operate… whateva.

  34. Chuck says:

    Jo, if being raped is awful then surely those who are concerned about being raped would take a few reasonable precautions to avoid this occurring. I am sure the vast majority do, but those who gross stupidity should accept some responsibility.

    If I leave my keys in the car or my house unlocked I am sure the insurance company may refuse my claim. There are certain parts of Auckland I would not walk at night and pubs which I would not enter. Are you trying to say many women are too stupid not to walk alone through certain parts of a city at night particularly if they have had too much to drink?

    It would be nice if one you militant man hating feminist would answer a question. It would take much less time than typing so much of a diatribe against men.

    I asked, what is an appropriate sentence for a woman perjuring herself at a rape trial?

    Many of you may be too young to remember the case of Nick Wills, falsely accused of rape by some nutter. The trial did not go to Court but before the liar recanted it had cost Nick and his family tens of thousands of dollars. If Nick did not have family support and his family the resources the case could have gone to Court and he could have been wrongly convicted.

    The woman who caused Nick and his family so much harm received 150 hours community service and permanent name suppression. Rape Crisis strongly supported the name suppression. The public were outraged including most reasonable women.

    I bet you and Tristan are incapable of giving a straight answer.

  35. jo says:

    i dont hate men- in fact i like them very much.
    though it’s largely predictable that you would jump on me for being a manhater- for what? supporting women who have been raped? supporting men who have been raped? its as if you believe that because i am For something, i am Against something else. well that sort of polarisation gets nobody, nowhere and i dont indulge in it.

    the point i was trying to make chuck was that people make mistakes. your mistake of
    passing out drunk in a vulnerable position didn’t land you in too much trouble considering what could have happened. -some people aren’t so lucky.

    you referred to paris hilton as if she represents women…? she didn’t take responsibility for her actions no. but unlike a rape victim SHE was the one who broke the law. so the comparison is therefore void.

    i initially was not responding to your question regarding due punishment for women who have made bogus complaints. but this is all i have to say on the matter:

    women who make false complaints against men foremost, need help as it can be almost taken for granted that they have some serious sexually violent history that is not resolved.

    just as men who rape need some serious help of their own. to deal with whatever bent their twig when they were younger and led to them growing into a crooked tree.

    i was responding to vague stench of misogony that polluted your post. and this is all i have to say on that matter

    noone deserves to be assulted
    rapists are to blame for their perpetrations upon vulnerable members of society- not their victims.

    i can only hope that is straight enough for you chuck.

  36. Tristan Egarr says:

    Chuck – the Nick Wills case you cite is indeed tragic, because, as you say, the victim (Nick) lost tens of thousands of dollars and suffered a traumatic experience because of a false claim.

    But what is tragic here is the justice system’s inability to help victims, and this does not apply only to men falsely accused of rape. When a person is a victim of a crime and the crime goes to court, the victim will often have to attend the trial; this creates transport costs and time off work (therefore lost income). This happens to a wide variety of victims, including people who are raped – and the govt. rarely pays the costs involved.

    Thus the problem you have identified (the cost of the justice system to victims) applies to most victims, not just men falsely accused of rape. It is a problem which also harms those who are victims of actual rapes. I would like to see changes to the justice system which properly compensate victims, including the case you cite; not just in terms of monetary, but also trauma, both to those falsely accused, and those who have actually been raped and are re-traumatised by the trial where they are often accused of lying. Unfortunately, given the need to ascertain the truth, this trauma (both to those who are actually raped, and to those who are falsely accused) is probably unavoidable. It is the price of fair justice.

  37. not a "man hating" feminist says:

    Protest! this tuesday, 12 pm, outside the national police headquarters 108 molesworth st.

    clint rickards has been suspended on full pay for three years. at the moment he is being paid $150,000 a year to sit on his arse. that’s twice the amount given by the government to wellington women’s refuge last year ($70,000).

    why is a man who has been accused of rape by two different women, who has publicly defended convicted rapists, being paid more then an organisation which supports women survivors of relationship abuse? what the fuck are the government’s priorities?

  38. Chuck says:

    Why should Clint Rickard be singled out? When a police officerlike aschool teacher is charged they are is on full pay until found guilty. In the first case Rickard was accused by a woman who had made a false allegetion. It was a case of he said she said. Under out system of justice a person must be found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In the second case it is unlikely he was even there.

    Why do you not protest aginst Helen Clark and David Benson-Pope getting their pay. there was a prima facie case of serious offending against both of them. In the case of Benson-Pope there was plenty of evidence of him offending against underage girls.

    Do you think Bensom-Pope should have had to face a jury as Rickard did?

  39. bloke says:

    For fuck sake, what is the matter with you girls? Why do you insist that you’re the week, fragile and vulnerable? Why don’t you want to be equal with men?

    How fucking arrogant of you to tell us guys what it is to be a guy. You tell us that rape is not about sex it is about power and control. You tell us that rape is always his fault and how dare we question the victim’s behaviour. As far as you’re concerned, he should stop at your command and if he doesn’t, he is a rapist.

    You haven’t got the faintest idea what it is like to wonder around with a body full of testosterone. Look at the size of the genitals: if your clitoris has as many erogenous sensors per square mm as a penis, you only have a minute fraction of the sexual sensitivity a man has. As far as mother nature is concerned, she does a brilliant job encouraging reproduction by making women irresistible to men and men powerful enough to take it when available. That is precisely how mammals operate and humans are mammals. Accept it, learn to live with it and get over it!

    Even so, all but a handful of idiots understand the disadvantages of rape and oppose rapists. We guys detest these bastards who jump out of the bushes and rape as much as you gals do.

    OTOH, we understand ourselves well enough and are not surprised that if she walks around like a slut and gets pissed, some lad might take advantage of her. Not only do you girls want him locked up for good, you tell her that she has done nothing wrong! Instead of telling her to take responsibility for her own action, you abscond her from any wrongdoing and thereby encourage other women to put themselves into the same risky situation.

    Nature isn’t fair, get over it.

  40. jo says:

    what prey tell did helen heels do to deserve suspension?
    please dont tell me it was that painting!!

    firstly i think we can all agree that looking at his criminal history as a whole that
    there .is.reasonable.doubt.

    secondly the point is, he’s getting more in a year for being suspended than the entire caplitals’ collective for housing battered women and children get in two!

    this, along with the attitude of unconscious little boys without a clue- such as yourself, goes to show that the entire climate towards women in our fair land is hostile and more than a little reluctant to take responsibilty.

    why dont you get out and stand for support of clint rickards and his mates if you feel so strongly about their rights?
    you might make more of an impact than you do hiding behind your computer sniggering at people who are actively fighting for the rights of victims.

    oh of course! your a coward.

  41. Laura says:

    Oh, men have lots of erogenous sensors needing fulfillment? Well I suppose that justifies rape then… FYI (according to, like, Cosmo, there are twice as many nerve endings in a clitoris than a penis).

    As you say, of course men can get drunk and sleep around, but when a woman does anything like that, she’s ‘asking for it’. How is being raped ‘her own action’?

    Nature? WTF? So rape is just part of nature?

    I’m sorry, but you’re an idiot.

  42. jo says:

    oh hi bloke- sorry didn’t see you there.

    you ask:
    what is the matter with you girls? Why do you insist that you’re the week, fragile and
    vulnerable? Why don’t you want to be equal with men?

    only then to ask:
    we (men i presume) understand ourselves well enough and are not surprised that if she walks around like a slut and gets pissed, some lad might take advantage of her.

    gee youre like a walking oozing contradiction.

    “nature isnt fair get over it”
    well that i can agree with. for nature to bestow something as revolting as you upon the earth is truly a tragedy.

    i feel the vomit rise as i sit here thinking involuntarily about you
    though i expect you feel just as sick every morning when you look in the mirror and eveluate who you are and where you’re at.
    im sorry for all your shortcomings bloke- it cant be easy being repugnant.
    i simply cant imagine what it must be being only able to acheive any sense of satisfaction through the degredation of others.

    why dont we want to be equal with men?
    because to taint or sex with an horriffic waste of blood and organs such as yourself would be the lowest form of comprimise.

    your childhood must have been truly miserable and with such a long lonely life ahead of you i can almost pity you

  43. bloke says:

    I’m not degrading others, you are degrading yourself by portraying yourself as weak, helpless, fragile creatures unable to take responsibility and adjust your own behaviour.

    There are of course real women who are on par with men and respected as equals because the can see through your feminist bullshit.

  44. Chuck says:

    Jo why do you not try reading post before responding with rambling abusive post?

    Unlike you I take the breaking of the law by police, judiciary or MPs very seriously. Forgery is a serious crime. It is certainly more serious than driving a tractor up a few steps at Parliament.

    We will leave Helen’s forgery aside. I note you have ignored my question about David Benson-Pope. I repeat it below.

    Do you think Benson-Pope should have had to face a jury as Rickard did?

    Before you accuse others of childish behaviour, try showing a little maturity and debate the issues in an adult manner.

  45. jo says:

    are you not being a slave to nature with your cave man rape proclaiming genetic disposition excuses for being a shame of a man?

    => its you not taking responsibilty troglodyte.

    anyway ive indulged you enough by acknowledging your pathetic existence and ‘views’ on the matter. i think now ill let you be, in your own miserable sespool.

    eat a dick- preferably your own.
    sincerely, jo

  46. Joe Bloggs says:

    Clint Rickard was found not guilty by a jury.

    While his co-defendants in the Nicholls case were found guilty of of another rape, that was far from a safe conviction. It was the word of one woman gainst a group of men, but she was the woman, so she was believed.

    I am not saying they were innocent but I am saying that there was not enough evidence to convict them and that one woman’s word from 15 years earlier is not good enough.

    Why did she not complain at the time?

    Otherwise, we have a world were women are automatically beleieved and men are automatically doubted.

    Any man who has ever had sex with a woman should be afraid, very afraid.

    Mind you, feminazis don’t care how many innocent men are locked up as long as no rapists, real or otherwise, go free.

  47. Chuck says:

    Why is my comment awaiting moderation while a realy abusive one
    gets through?

    I am posting as you contact form does not work.

    I quote from offensive post

    eat a dick- preferably your own.
    sincerely, jo

  48. Tristan Egarr says:

    “but she was the woman, so she was believed.” – Joe Bloggs

    According to your logic, the word of the woman is believed simpy because she is a woman.

    Thus, according to your logic, Louise Nicholas would have been believed and Clint Rickards would be in jail, as would every single other man accused of rape… no wait a second… that didn’t happen in Nicholas’ case and in hundreds of other cases, where the man’s word is accepted… therefore your belief that the woman is always believed is quite easily disproved.

    Therefore the police and courts do not simply believe women because they are women, therefore you, Joe Bloggs, are WRONG. God I love empirical falsification.

  49. Tristan Egarr says:

    Eek, scratch out “disproved” and replace with “disproven” – even Popper can’t save my spelling.

  50. Chuck says:

    Fortunately, the technical problems are solved so I can now blog. I must go out so this will be short.

    Joe, it would be a real shame if this turned into a man against woman debate. I was a jury member on a rape trial. It did not long for 11 members of the jury to release that the complainant was lying through teeth as she had been dumped. The twelfth member quickly caved in. is, I know some women do lie about rape.

    It does not matter if someone is pack raped or assaulted by a group of police we cannot simply say we always take the word of the majority.

    Can you explain why you think you know more than the jury who heard all the evidence?

  51. Joe Bloggs says:

    A woman claims that somehing happened fifteen years ago.

    It is her word against the word of a number of others. There is no real evidence.

    Yet she is the one who is believed.

    I am not saying that she necessarily made it up but I am saying that the word of one against the word of three does not constitute “beyond reasonable doubt”.

  52. Taliesin says:

    I hope I never run into Jo on a dark night.

    I have never read such violence, loathing and hatred since I last looked through a Valerie Solanos book.

    What a sad, bitter and twisted individual.

  53. Chuck says:

    Joe, it would be a real shame if this turned into a man against woman debate. I was a jury member on a rape trial. It did not long for 11 members of the jury to release that the complainant was lying through teeth as she had been dumped. The twelfth member quickly caved in. is, I know some women do lie about rape.

    It does not matter if someone is pack raped or assaulted by a group of police we cannot simply say we always take the word of the majority.

    Can you explain why you think you know more than the jury who heard all the evidence?

  54. Chuck says:

    Joe, it would be a real shame if this turned into a man against woman debate. I was a jury member on a rape trial. It did not long for 11 members of the jury to release that the complainant was lying through teeth as she had been dumped. The twelfth member quickly caved in. is, I know some women do lie about rape.

    It does not matter if someone is pack raped or assaulted by a group of police we cannot simply say we always take the word of the majority.

    Can you explain why you think you know more than the jury who heard all the evidence?

  55. Taliesin says:

    Something interesting that I read tonight:

    “A report from the US Department for Justice, “Convicted by Juries,
    Exonerated by Science” showed that in the seven years from 1989, new
    forensic DNA testing excluded about 20 per cent of sexual assault case
    suspects. The five main reasons for wrongful conviction: mistaken
    eyewitness identification, witnesses being coerced to make
    confessions, misconduct by law enforcement agencies, unreliable
    forensic laboratory work, and ineffective representation by defence

    If, as a few feminists want us to believe, women rarely lie about rape, then the DNA must be telling lies instead.

  56. Taliesin says:

    Chuck: do you mean “Jo” or “Joe Bloggs”?

  57. Chuck says:

    Now that I hopefully have my technical problem sorted out so my posts do not get held up I will expand.

    As a man I support historical claim for sexual and other abuse. Although men are rarely sexual abused except in prison adolescent boys often are and do not report it for various reasons.

    I recently seen a documentary about children abused by electric shock at an institution for children who were meant to have mental problems. The offender who was a psychiatrist was in Australia and our government could not be bother pushing for extradition. Mind you the victims were adolescent boys at the time. If they were girls it would probably be a different story.

    Sexual abuse of adolescent boys is a problem. When men try to protect them by trying to take sensible precautions like not having homosexual Scout Masters they get attacked by the feminist. Political Correctness trumps safety of adolescent boys.

  58. Chuck says:

    Taliesin, I have still a few problems psoting. Hopefully iit has been resovled. In any case as you will see from my previous post I meant Joe Bloggs. As you will see from my last post why I support historical cases − at least part of the reason. I like to support what is fair and right not just as what is good for men.

    Those two cops convicted of rape should have had their previous conviction made known to the jury. A likely reason why it was not was because they were after Rickard and he was not involved in the one they were convicted of. Contrary to what many think a person’s record and be made known to the jury if the MO is very similar.

    Women have some reasonable grounds to complain. Many men acknowledge this. It is pity that more women did not accept men also have reasonable grounds for complaint about the justice system.

  59. jo says:

    “I recently seen a documentary about children abused by electric shock at an institution for children who were meant to have mental problems. The offender who was a psychiatrist was in Australia and our government could not be bother pushing for extradition. Mind you the victims were adolescent boys at the time. If they were girls it would probably be a different story.”

    i think you need to get your facts straightned.

    ect (electroconvulsive therapy/ electctric ‘abuse’ was widely used to treat mental health problems and common to popular belief still is today in nz and around the world (although not as widely)
    practices earlier this century were unethical to say the least ie. no use of anesthetics- now patients go under a local.
    inthe 50s and 60s child mental health hospital down south (sunnyside? cant remember the name) treated hundreds of nz children. just iver a decade ago they payed millions in reperation to the majority if these kids who are now adults and generaly suffer more mental illefects due to their experiences at this hospital. the majority of complainants and subsequently, those paid reperation were boys. my uncle was one and i about 5 years ago i met another man who was paid compensated just over 100 grand (needless to say most of it went up his arm)

    so contrary to what you might think, the government and society generally do take mens abuse just as seriously as womens as evidenced in this case…

    remember was it christmas day in newtown that a man was reped in newtown? the rapist was described as having a facial tattoo. this was highly publicised (with the complainants name being suppressed). its great that it was so highly publisised and is due in part i think the general consensus that a man being violated in this way is more devestating and perhaps more of a public interest than had a woman been in his situation.

    now i can conceed that a man would doubtlessly be devestated by this happening but the amount of effort the police and media went to to track his perpetrator is praportionatly much higher than in any of the rapes against women in this city since then.

    hows that for equality?

  60. Taliesin says:

    To the contrary Jo, the media (and society in general) are so much in denial about the level of absue, sexual or otherwise, sustained by men, that this story had shock value as being a rare event when it was in fact a typical homosexual rape.

    Louise Nicholls would not have got the same media sympathy had she been a man.

  61. Taliesin says:

    I know that some pedant is bound to question my lack of precision, so I should add that by a “homosexual rape” I mean an instance of a woman raping a woman or a man raping a man.

    I am not commenting on anyone’s sexual preference.

  62. Tristan Egarr says:

    Every year in New Zealand, several women will tell the police that they have been raped when, in fact, they have not. Neither I nor anyone else who has stood up to Taliesin and his supporters in this thread have denied this. This month a woman was fined $10,000 for just such a lie (though it should be noted that she did not attempt to accuse and thus victimise any specific man, so cannot be accused of the “human rights abuse” Taliesin would like to link to false rape claims).

    What we have consistently taken issue with is the claim that there is a “pandemic” of false rape claims. The reason for taking issue with this is simple: the evidence I have looked at suggests that for every false rape claim, several actual rapes occur for which there is no prosecution, due to the difficulty of collecting evidence, or the victim (man of woman)’s fear of involving the police and desire to avoid further traumatic proceedings. Speaking from personal experiences, most people I know who have been raped (men and women) have not reported their rapes to the police; most of those I know who have reported to the police, have seen no prosecution taken against the offender, besides a ‘warning’. But personal experience does not a good argument make.

    “The Word of a Woman? Police, Rape and Belief” by Jan Jordan (a lecturer at the Institute of Criminology at Victoria University), looks at a 1997 study into the 164 rape claims made by women which were closed as “no offence disclosed” in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch in that year (from a total of 718 reported overall sex attacks in those cities in that year, 395 of which were “resolved”).

    As Jordan points out, while the “no offence disclosed” tag looks like it clears the accused, it does not. Of the 164 claims, 38 were identified as probably true, but without enough evidence to secure a conviction; 68 were identified by police as probably false (13 of which were said to be false by the complainant). However, of the 55 said to be false by the police (but not the complainant), several were only listed as false because the complaint was withdrawn – and since true complaints are often withdrawn because the victim cannot bear the trauma of the investigation, this number can be misleading. The remaining number were unsolved either because the police could not find the perpetrator, or because there was insufficient evidence for the police to reach any conclusion whatsoever.

    What the 55 complaints identified as false by police (but not complainant) prove is that the police often do believe the accused and not the complainant, thus disproving the claim that female accusers are always believed. The 38 indentified as true demonstrate that, even if the police believe the female accuser, they will not proceed with prosecution unless they can find enough evidence to make their case potentially provable in a court of law.

    Other than this, the evidence simply demonstrates that rape claims are difficult to prove as either true or false; many of cases listed as “no offence” were not in fact cases where the police believed no offence had occurred. If we add this to the hundreds of rape complaints every year which never reach the police*, we can see that actual rape which results in no conviction is indeed a major problem.

    *[obviously no one lists the actual number since they are not reported, but hundreds is a conservative estimate based upon the experiences of those who work with victims of rape]

    It cannot statistically be proven that non-conviction of actual rape is more common than false accusation of rape – it appears likely, but when dealing with hidden crimes we are not given the luxury of certainty. So, finally (and I have no intention of posting any more on this thread), here is the reason why I keep engaging in this wee debate: while false accusations of rape are indeed a problem, we need to put this problem within the larger context of the difficulty of investigating rape, and to see it in the light of the massive number of victims who receive no justice for actual rapes. Because to simply scream “Pandemic! Blame the feminazis!” is to forget about truth, to forget about justice, and instead to focus upon victimising one group of society because of some vendetta; this makes it even harder than it already is to find a solution to the problem of rape. And that is just moronic.


  63. Chuck says:

    Jo, I really begrudge paying taxes to try and educate you.

    Any young person who thinks they know everything about everything has an awful lot to learn.

    You obviously did not see the documentary I was referring to. I know what ECT is I helped administer it many years ago while I was a trainee psychotic nurse. It was given for treatment not as a form of punishment.

    The ECT administered to the boys was given a punishment for minor infractions of the rules or to those who were slow at school. It was not for treatment but for some sick pleasure of a sick psychiatrist.

    “my uncle was one and i about 5 years ago i met another man who was paid compensated just over 100 grand (needless to say most of it went up his arm)”

    Why add the last bit about the money being spent on drugs? The clear implication is typical man.

    And you accuse the men on this blog who disagree with you of being anti-women. I have plenty of women friends − more mature women who are embarrassed by foul mouthed immature adolescents like you.

  64. Chuck says:

    Tristan, you are typical of militant feminists. You put out misinformation and then say you do not what debate the issue.

    Firstly, the woman you referred was not fined as you claim. She was ordered to pay $10,000 as partial reparation of the $60,000 it cost the police to investigate this false complaint. I might add this was her third false complaint for rape.

    I actually feel sorry for this woman and give her credit for fronting the media.

    However, my point is that you are misrepresenting the facts.

    You might have seen that unlike you militant feminist I disagreed with another man who tried to claim the two cops did not get a fair trial. Of course you made no mention of it or neither did you criticize you foul mouthed friend Jo.

    The only men you agree with are the left wing sycophants who agree with your sick feminist ideology. The basis of this ideology is that woman, homosexuals and racial minorities make up the victim class and patriarch made up of white heterosexual males are the oppressors.

    I will tell you and others who do not have a closed mind briefly why I feel so strongly on this issue.

    A number of years ago I was on a jury on a rape trial. The complaint at first came across as credible. However, after listening to the defence it was clear that this spiteful woman was lying through her teeth because the guy she accused of raping her had in fact ended their relationship. There was a female witness who testified how she was over the accused like a rash after the alleged rapes.

    A number of the jurors including some women when down to the pub and had a drink with the real victim, a new immigrant and said they hoped he did not judge New Zealand by his unfortunate experience.

    A couple of days later I phoned the police prosecutor and asked why the case when to court. He told me it was police policy to bring a case to court if the complaint sticks to her story. I then asked why this woman was not charged with perjury. He did not try to argue that there was not a prima facie case. His view was that charging a woman who perjured herself would deter genuine complainants from coming forward. The clear implication was that he agreed this woman was not genuine.

    This is why woman should not automatically be assumed to be telling the truth. If the police had been a little more sceptical in the Papakura case they would have saved a lot of time and money.

    In the case of the woman in the about rape trial the man would have been sentenced to 7 to 10 years in jail if he was found guilty. Some people argue she should have received the penalty. I do not agree – rape and perjury and two different crimes. I believe if found guilty by a jury she should have received a 2 to 3 year jail sentence.

    Many men would be more supportive if you man hating feminists showed just a little bit of balance and were prepared to criticise women who act badly.

    I cannot recall the name but I am sure about the case of a woman sentenced to 16 years for the murder of her little daughter along with her partner. When she was released the feminists sent her flowers and a limo to pick her up.

    We hear of many cases of woman doing nothing while her new partner abuses her children. Feminist continue to make excuses for these poor excuses for mothers.

    Is nice to see some non man hating feminists like Kerre Woodham condemn these women.

    If you man hating feminist showed just a little balance you might get more support.

  65. Taliesin says:

    A $10,000 fine for trying to send a man to prison for 7-10 years is not justice, it is a mockery.

    By the way Tristan, you still have not answered my question. I can only guess that you are too scared to honestly answer in public.

    Would you care to prove me wrong?

  66. Chuck says:

    Unlike the feminists on this blog men will disagree with one and other as we are not into bashing the opposite sex. I will not say fairer sex.

    Taliesin I believe has it wrong. The disturbed woman in Papakura who claimed she was raped was not attempting to send a man to prison. If she had of been prosecuted for her first allegation instead of her third it would a have saved a lot people much bother.

    I think repaying $10,000, a small part of the cost of the police investigation while make sure she does not re-offend and be a deterrent to others.
    The case of the student who accused Nick Wills of rape was a different story. She could have put him away for a long time. She should have been jailed not given community service and permanent name suppression.

    The woman who perjured herself on the rape trial where I was a juror should definitely been jailed. She tried to put an ex lover away because he ended their relationship.

    BTW – I think you will wait a long time for an answer from Tristan. She is thinks woman always have an excuse be it some guy from the past or what ever. These so called liberated women are joke they do not want to accept responsibility for anything.

    They will say being whistled at from a building sight is almost rape but overlook what politicians from their side do to women. You did not hear many feminists call for Bill Clinton to resign. And you do not hear any left wing feminist say that David Benson-Pope should have had to answer for perving on adolescent girls.

  67. Tristan Egarr says:

    “Unlike the feminists on this blog men will disagree with one and other as we are not into bashing the opposite sex.” – Chuck
    Given that I explicitly criticised certain trends in feminism, this sentence demonstrates that you don’t actually read my posts.

    “By the way Tristan, you still have not answered my question.” – Taliesin
    Taliesin, I have answered your question twice. I can only assume that you are not reading my posts either.

    This is not a debate. It is two misogynists ranting, me demonstrating why they are morons, and then the same two men ranting some more without reading their critics. I keep posting because it saddens me to see so much misinformed hatred on this thread. But given that I’m not actually being read, there is not point in continuing this charade, which is why I say good day to you, sirs.

  68. Matty Smith says:

    “You did not hear many feminists call for Bill Clinton to resign.”

    Barring the rest of your paranoid delusions (go join MENZ), what are you even talking about here? Clinton didn’t “do” anything to Lewinsky that wasn’t consented to (we must presume). The outrage at Clinton was not some Feminist plot, but an irrational religious-driven moral outrage at his infidelity (and acknowledgement that he had a sex life in general). I imagine most Feminists would merely have been sympathetic for his wife, but not screeching like banshees for his impeachment.

  69. Chris Marsden says:

    What exactly is “paranoid and delusional” on ?

    It is a very refreshing change from the usual feminist hysteria.

  70. Taliesin says:

    Chuck, it is becoming clear that Tristan lacks the balls to answer my question.

    It is disturbing that gender issues are so dominated by an extremist ideology that has become an unquestionable orthodoxy that anybody who even question it is automatically deemed to be a sexist or misogynist.

    In ’32 they blamed the Jew, today they’re blaming men.

  71. Matt says:


  72. Tristan Egarr says:

    For the last time… Taliesin, your question compares apples with indefined fruit.
    “…if I was given a choice of being wrongfully locked up for eight years or being raped, I could not rule out choosing the latter. Which would YOU choose?”

    8 years jail is on the absolute worse end of the scale of possible outcomes for someone falsely accused of rape; by far the most likely outcome is a police investigation with no conclusion. So you define the outcome for the accused man as “the most extreme possible outcome”, whereas you leave “rape” indefined.

    So let’s compare apples with apples and take the most extreme end of the rape scale, either
    a) being put on the slab and brutally tortured for hours by a pack of large hairy men, suffering major internal injuries; or
    b) a small girl raped by a family member over several years.

    Well… I’m going to have to go for the jail.

    Or we can compare oranges with oranges, and take the more mild end of both spectrums, so that we have
    i) being accused of rape, and being unable to ever clear one’s name because the police do not have enough information to close the case
    ii) being raped once by a date or a stranger with little injury.

    I’m still going to have to go with being accused, since although the discomfort of the investigation would suck, I still do not see this as bad as the violation.

    Of course, this whole thing is misconcieved, because what we need to do here is work against a society which accepts such acts of violence; philosophically deciding which acts are less unacceptable than others isn’t going to get us anywhere. But hey, at least now you can’t keep pretending I won’t answer your pathetic pissing challenge. Taliesin, I dare you to have the balls to accept an answer that does not bow to your manipulation of words in order to present a misleading question.

    Goodnight sweety, don’t let the feminazis bite. Psych!

  73. Taliesin says:

    According to Tristan:

    “It is two misogynists ranting, me demonstrating why they are morons, and then the same two men ranting some more without reading their critics. I keep posting because it saddens me to see so much misinformed hatred on this thread.”

    Tristan is demonstrating the typical bullying tactics of employed by feminists. Disagree with them and you are “misogynists” or women-haters”.

    Applying this logic in reverse us like saying that all feminists or anyone else who disgarees with masculist perspectives are “misandrists” and “man-haters”, yet Tristan has taken great pains to say that they are not.

    I do thank him for partially answering my question; I say partially because the answer was weakened by a myraid of distractions.

    As for his attempts to dismiss my disclosure of a pandemic of malicious false accusations, that is based on my experience as a men’s counsellor. Tristan should try listening to men as well as women for a change. Maybe instead of dismissing all men’s concerns because they do not fit into his extremely narrow view of the world, Tristan could take a look at our concerns and I repeat my suggestion that he read ‘The Myth of Male Power’ by Warren Farrell. There is a copy in the Wellington Public Library.

    We should never be afraid to have our way of thinking challenged.

  74. Cfuck says:

    What do I think of that? I think Tristan must have won the arguement if you’re making such desperate attempts to run his person down instead.

  75. Chuck says:

    Tristan can speak for him or herself.

    Is it true or false?

  76. Jean-Michel says:

    Yeah, that’s just plain fucking creepy and dickish, Chuck.

  77. Chuck says:

    I object to homosexuals trying to tell normal men how they should relate to women.

    How many real women on the blog would be happy to have sex with a bi sexual?

    Any normal woman with half a brain would not consider it for health reason if for nothing else.

  78. Matt says:

    It’s obvious Chuck’s hatred of women and homosexuals is equal only to his hatred of himself.

    And probably blacks.

  79. Della says:

    Chuck you’re a complete nutcase. Quick question, did you choose the alias Chuck because it sounds “manly”? I’d rather sleep with Tristan than a psychotic woman-hater like you. You’ve got a small penis don’t you? I’m sorry.

  80. Tristan Egarr says:

    “I thought Tristan was just a man hating female. It turns out Tristan is a male name.”
    – chuck.
    Given that I have already stated that I am man on this thread, this just proves that you’re hurling abuse at me without actually reading my posts… HA!

    “Tristan is demonstrating the typical bullying tactics of employed by feminists. Disagree with them and you are “misogynists” or women-haters”.”
    – Taliesin
    Oh, so it’s okay for you and your pals to call us “militants”, “feminazis” and “misandrists”, but NOT OKAY for us to point out your own biases? Given that you seem to think it is oppressive towards men for women to speak out against rape, this shouldn’t really come as a surprise.

    Oops. I try to avoid personal abuse and yet.. look what I’m doing. Given that this whole thread has turned from a serious and rather important discussion to a set of aspersions cast upon my character, I suppose this ain’t out of order, but it does demonstrate just how bankrupt all this is.

    I challenge either Chuck of Taliesin to defend their ravings against any single thing I have written. Otherwise, I really should put my money where my mouth is a leave well enough alone. It’s hard to leave when I’m getting such juicy abuse from y’all, but well… flogging a dead horse etcetera. Au revoir.

  81. Tristan Egarr says:

    p.s. I really, really want to say sorry Nicola, sorry that I helped fill up your article’s comments with such a rubbish “debate”. Your article deserves better.

  82. Taliesin says:

    Tristan, Tristan, Tristan, you should really listen to yourself. Just who is doing all the raving here.

    I point out that there is a pervading ideology that men almost always lie and women almost never do, and you jump in all guns blazing, not even considering that there may be some truth in what I am saying.

    I point out that I counselled men for many years and that I have seen a different side of the coin to the orthodox feminist line. You try to tell me that I simply have a “grudge against women who have been abused”.

    Other people post their experiences, but you respond with insults, clichés and simplistic rhetoric instead of debating the issues. You accuse people of “hatred” for committing the crime of disagreeing with you. It was in response to this kind of attitude that I responded with metaphors alluding to fascism, and now I appear to stand accused of suggesting that “all feminists are nazis” when I said nothing of the sort. Bloody hell, my partner would call herself a feminist, and she is a middle of the road very rational woman and not an extremist nutter, but the latter are out there.

    Take Della. She thinks it is funny to tell someone that they have a small penis. What is someone was to tell her that her vulva looked like a badly packed kebab and smelled like blue vein cheese? I would bet good money that she would not like that, yet it was alright for her to insult someone else on the basis of her fantasies about the state of someone else’s genitalia.

    There is a double standard here, Tristan, which you are helping to uphold, and you are too blind to see it. Read Farrell. You may not agree with him but at least you will see the other side of the story, if you are brave enough to be so open minded.

  83. Tristan Egarr says:

    My problem is, and has always been, with the idea of this “pervading ideology”. Taliesin, you may yourself be an open-minded and tolerant person, but I have hung around with hundreds of men who do treat women like their toys, and who think that all women lie and decieve whereas they themselves are good honest blokes. Rather than raving, I have simply pointed out that this “feminist dominance” is not infact dominant. Listen to the commercial radio – for every Michael Laws, Lindsay Perigo and John Tamihere blaming feminism for “the problems of the modern world”, how many are there who suggest the other line, that women are more oppressed by men than vice versa? Maybe Marcus Lush when he feels political, which is seldom. The fact is, popular culture and public discourse is more dominated by men who blame women in general for theirproblems than it is by women who blame men for their problems, though I don’t doubt that the latter exist.

    Perhaps Universities are an exception to this general rule… for which there are many reasons.

  84. Taliesin says:

    Tristan, firstly thank you for being civil.

    I must state that I rarely listen to commercial radio, and when I do, it seems obvious to me that the opinions aired have little, if any, impact on social policy. On the contrary, non-commercial radio, public television and much print media is taken seriously by people in influential positions.

    “Jim” might right up national radio complaining about how his wife left him, took the children, and later kicked him out of the family home. He may get a sympathetic ear, but that is all.

    TVNZ might run a documentary about domestic violence that almost totally focuses on men’s violence and barely mention’s women’s violence and is watched and taken in by many.

    I would therefore question your view that “popular culture and public discourse is more dominated by men who blame women in general for their problems than it is by women who blame men for their problems”. May I suggest a simple exercise? Next time you are watching any American television drama or sitcom, take notes about each major character. Who is the victim? Who is the perpetrator? You will find that the perpetrator of anything bad is inevitably a man. Who is clever and who is stupid?

    You will find that only men, NEVER women, are portrayed as fools, and that a woman will usually triumph over a man. Try it and see what you come up with.

    Yes, I do agree that it is not helpful to suggest that one gender (or other group in society) oppresses its opposite more than vice versa, but that is what is happening with mainstream media. Domestic violence is a good issue to illustrate my point. Ask anybody off the street whether men or women engage in more domestic violence and 9/10 people will say men. In most cases, their answers will not be based on personal experience, but on what happens in American dramas and what they read in the latest media release from women’s refuge that was published verbatim in the Dominion-Post (not through any conspiracy but because the journalist was too lazy to look into the other side of the story). Yet, academic studies show that both genders are rough equally violent in domestic situations, but the aforementioned view is so ingrained that any counter view seems radical, even heretical. This is precisely what I mean by “pervading ideology”. It is self-perpetuating through events like “white ribbon day” that focus on the violence of men, totally ignore the violence of women, and reinforce the notion that violence is exclusively a male problem.
    My solution is not to do the reverse and have campaigns focussing on female violence, but to treat violence as being an issue that can affect all people, regardless of their gender, and to move away from solutions based purely on ideology.
    Yes, some men blame women for their problems, but just as many women blame men. However, I have noted that a radical feminist like Valerie Solanos (she started a group called ‘SCUM’ [Society for Cutting Up of Men] and advocated men being forced to have sex changes or go to gas chambers – I kid you not) will be portrayed as being an exception to the rule.

    Conversely, if anyone says anything radical in the men’s movement, it is portrayed as being what the movement stands for. It is my observation that many men end up in the movement (which, by the way, is roughly a third women), because they have been badly hurt and because men are still conditioned to “take it like a man”, have had little sympathy, and may say things that are out of place but jumped on by the media. Some years ago, I was at a demonstration outside a family court when one individual whom, I had never seen before started shouting out how his MP was a “faggot”. For once, I was glad that the media was ignoring us, like they did for many years, (which is why some group started targeting particularly notorious family lawyers, but I digress).

    The “pervading ideology” to which I refer is nothing I have imagined and is not the product of any prejudice. It is based on a number of decades of observation of media, politics and people getting hurt.

  85. Taliesin says:


    ““Jim” might right up national radio complaining….”

    should have read”

    ““Jim” might ring up radio pacific complaining… “

  86. Phillip says:


    More false complaints.

    Seems like there’s been more false complaints than true ones, lately!

  87. Tristan Egarr says:

    I’m sorry Taliesin, but the public discourse you describe simply isn’t the one I’m surrounded by every day. Firstly, the sexual objectification of women far outstrips that of men – there is no equivelent of FHM for women. This is not to say that men are never objectified (Dan Carter’s billboards disprove this), just that it is disproportionately against women.

    Second, you say that “the perpetrator of anything bad is inevitably a man”. Not almost inevitably; you say inevitably. But look at Michael Crichton’s Disclosure, or the character Atia on HBO’s ROME (to name just those examples which first come to mind). There are hundreds of examples of women-as-villains, women as villains who lie about men.

    Thirdly, while National Radio is, thankfully, often aware of the position of women in society, they do as you say present a counterview to this: even when they lean towards one side of an argument they strive to present interviewees from both. Commercial radio does not do so. It may not influence public policy so much, but it is very popular, and the anti-feminist sentiment it espouses does not simply represent a fringe of society.

    Thus it seems what you are opposing is not in fact a public or popular feminism (which does not exist), but government policies in favour of feminism. To which I would reply yes, perhaps our government is more feminist than our public, often because many of our leaders have a greater wealth of information at their disposal than the man or woman on the street. Which is certainly not to say that I support our government and everything that they do, just that you have mis-identified you target, and that your target has a point.

  88. Taliesin says:

    Hi Tristan

    Firstly, no, women do not have ‘FHM’. They have ‘Cosmopolitan’ and ‘Sex in the City instead.’

    Secondly, yes maybe there are some instances where the villain is a woman and the hero is the man, but these are certainly a minority.

    Thirdly, have you considered that commercial radio may well reflect a reaction against the social engineering implicit on other media?

    Fourthly, the “greater wealth of information” at the disposal of the government seems to consist of opinions sourced in deeply ingrained ideology. It is pretty patronising to assume that our leaders are any more culpable than the man and women in the street.

    Finally, “cuntionary”, thank you for re-stating my case for me. I could not have done a better job myself.

    By the way, thank you for thinking of my partner. She is very happy, capable and contented, something that it appears that you will never be with your seething hatred and bitterness. Not all feminists hate men you know.

  89. Phillip says:

    Oh Salient… I posted a comment about the recent case of the twelve year old girl who was caught lying about rape, trying to frame a 16 year old boy. But it wasn’t approved on the site. Why’s that? Censorship already, Nicoll?

  90. Poeleo says:

    It’s not the first time stuff has been censored at Salient this year but usually it’s been more about what Nichol’s buddy Cosgrove wants.

  91. Treacle Tart says:

    You would be more of a pit bull I suppose cuntionary.

  92. anarkaytie says:

    I’ve been avoiding checking this thread, ‘cos I knew it would take a while.

    So much idiocy, misogyny and general ignorance is mind-boggling in it’s entirety, as laid out here to be seen.

    Valerie Solanaas wrote a book, S.C.U.M., which advocated, not the capital punishment of rapists (that was Andrea Dworkin), but the *castration* of rapists. Not a sex-change, a removal of the offensive weapon.

    Then there’s the narrow-minded homophobia.
    Chuist on a stick (yes, I AM being deliberately offensive), I’m a happy sexual being, who has had sex with a bisexual man in the past, and hell, he was a multiple-orgasm providor, so all you rigidly homophobic wankers take note.

    Half of you don’t even have a clue what to do with your own genitals, let alone the erogenous zones of the other genders.

    As Tristan has so rightly pointed out, some of you don’t seem to be able to read and digest that which has passed before your eyes. Please don’t tell me you’re law students, that would make the behaviour even lamer.

    And no, I’m not interested in replying to any of your pathetic immature rants.
    Signing out!

  93. Taliesin says:

    Anarkaytie, I could say “So much idiocy, MISANDRY and general ignorance is mind-boggling in it’s entirety, as laid out here to be seen.”

    Do you really consider that disagreeing with feminist othodoxy qualifies one as a misogynist? That is very sad and and pathetic and is the sort of comment I would expect from a fascist, not from an anarchist.

    I must say though that, I was amused to observe that this debate has descended into the area of sexual performance.

    That is a sign of desperation.

    You write of a “multiple orgasm providor(sic)” as if it is rarity.

    I assure you that almost any man is capable of giving women multiple orgasms. I would suggest that those “homophobic wankers” just didn’t think you were worth it, and who could blame them?

    Finally, I actually, WAS referring to Solanos (see text below) although Dworkin was every bit as much of a misandrist bittre hate-fuelled nutcase as Solanos was..

    “The few remaining men can exist out their puny days dropped out on drugs or strutting around in drag or passively watching the high-powered female in action, fulfilling themselves as spectators, vicarious livers*[FOOTNOTE: It will be electronically possible for him to tune into any specific female he wants to and follow in detail her every movement. The females will kindly, obligingly consent to this, as it won’t hurt them in the slightest and it is a marvelously kind and humane way to treat their unfortunate, handicapped fellow beings.] or breeding in the cow pasture with the toadies, or they can go off to the nearest friendly suicide center where they will be quietly, quickly, and painlessly gassed to death.”

    “Prior to the institution of automation, to the replacement of males by machines, the male should be of use to the female, wait on her, cater to her slightest whim, obey her every command, be totally subservient to her, exist in perfect obedience to her will, as opposed to the completely warped, degenerate situation we have now of men, not only not only not existing at all, cluttering up the world with their ignominious presence, but being pandered to and groveled before by the mass of females, millions of women piously worshiping the Golden Calf, the dog leading the master on a leash, when in fact the male, short of being a drag queen, is least miserable when his dogginess is recognized — no unrealistic emotional demands are made of him and the completely together female is calling the shots. Rational men want to be squashed, stepped on, crushed and crunched, treated as the curs, the filth that they are, have their repulsiveness confirmed.”

    “The sick, irrational men, those who attempt to defend themselves against their disgustingness, when they see SCUM barrelling down on them, will cling in terror to Big Mama with her Big Bouncy Boobies, but Boobies won’t protect them against SCUM; Big Mama will be clinging to Big Daddy, who will be in the corner shitting in his forceful, dynamic pants. Men who are rational, however, won’t kick or struggle or raise a distressing fuss, but will just sit back, relax, enjoy the show and ride the waves to their demise.”

  94. Taliesin says:

    I have pretty much said all I can say, for there is little more I can do to rationally argue with those who like to call people names for disagreeing with them and reason can not compensate for their immaturity.

    However, I wish to record my strong objection to the censorhip of some of ‘cuntionary’s’ comments.

    Her comments showed the ugly side of radiical feminism and should have been left there for all to see.

Recent posts

  1. VUW Halls Hiking Fees By 50–80% Next Year
  2. The Stats on Gender Disparities at VUW
  3. Issue 25 – Legacy
  4. Canta Wins Bid for Editorial Independence
  5. RA Speaks Out About Victoria University Hall Death
  6. VUW Hall Death: What We Know So Far
  8. New Normal
  9. Come In, The Door’s Open.
  10. Love in the Time of Face Tattoos

Editor's Pick

Uncomfortable places: skin.

:   Where are you from?  My list was always ready: England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, puppy dogs’ tails, a little Spanish, maybe German, and—almost as an afterthought—half Samoan. An unwanted fraction.   But you don’t seem like a Samoan. I thought you were [inser

Do you know how to read? Sign up to our Newsletter!

* indicates required